Chair Training - Fifth episode: "Horizontal Review" (session 1)

13 Oct 2015


See also: IRC log, Audio recording



Coralie Mercier, Arnaud Le Hors, Alan Stearns, Jeff Jaffe, Virginie Galindo, Joanmarie Diggs, Joseph Scheuhammer, Simon Sapin, Gregg Kellogg, Wendy Seltzer, Shane McCarron, Debbie Dahl, Charles McCathie Nevile
Virginie Galindo


<koaliie> Powerpoint: W3C horizontal review 101

<koaliie> PDF: W3C horizontal review 101

Jeff: I'd like to express gratitude for this module; it was Virginie's suggestion and she developed it
... At TPAC in two weeks, we'll be having a chairs breakfast Tuesday, 27 October, 07:30-08:30am
... I'd like to take this opportunity for us to go over how chairs leverage staff contacts
... what is important or less important
... I'm looking forward to hearing your perspectives in 2 weeks

[Training session audio is being recorded]


Virginie: Training is dedicated to chairs, and spec editors
... first time we're giving this training
... you'll have a chance to raise your questions
... if you have those during the presentation, please type q+ in IRC


Virginie: Benefits is for W3C to make sure all horizontal topics are handled correctly and seriously
... in technical deliverables
... goal today is to make sure you are aware of this
... You'll need support and this is what I'm going to explain today

[Richard Ishida and Wendy Seltzer are on this call]

Horizontal like what ? [slide 3]

Virginie: Idea is to have a Web that is trusted for all, available for all, has good performanace and enabler of business
... accessibility is a key point as is internationalization

Why, when and how should you horizontally review ? [slide 4]

Virginie: This is about your deliverable being compliant with the 4 concepts,
... it's important that these review happen starting at FPWD
... experts will come back to you on the design of your technology
... a first exchange as soon as possible in the creation of your spec is important
... We know that each of you editors, contributors, etc, don't have to be an expert in accessibility, internationalization or security
... each of the domains have specificities
... not everything is harmonised
... I'll go over each of them

Horizontal review mechanics [slide 5]

Virginie: When you write your spec, you may have started first with some requirements
... that would be good to inform the reviewers that you have those
... when you're in First Public WD, it's important to contact the appropriate reviewers with an approximate timeline
... you should also be able to give first feeling, e.g. do you expect a lot of user inteactions? think accessibility
... or sensitive data? think privacy review
... another mechanism that we'd like you to handle at W3C is to nominate a champion in your WG to deal with the reviewer
... and also be able to answer the experts' questions
... another thing is that horizontal review isn't one-shot
... you'll have to maintain it throughout the life of your spec
... e.g. every 6 months or according to your own timeline

Reviews… [slide 6]

Virginie: I am a chair of a WG. we chairs are busy and spec editors are busy as well
... we have to brave
... we really have to not ignore those reviews.

<Zakim> chaals, you wanted to suggest user interaction means think privacy and security too…

chaals: Just about how you decide who to bring in, if you have user interactions you should think about privacy
... and security concerns

<virginie> +1 to chaals

chaals: when you have a champion, it's good if you have someone who cares about accessibility and does accessbility stuff
... was we tried to do in Web Platforms is bring people with experience in the "horizontal" areas directly into the group to participate on an ongoing basis…
... now there's a vast pool of knowledge
... BUT, your accessibility or whatever expert won't know everything
... so, ensure you get the broadest set of reviews.

Virginie: Let's jump to the 4 domains
... and go over tools

Internationalization : I18n [slide 7]

Virginie: Richard Ishida of W3C is the lead
... i18n goal is to enable a technology to support any writing system of the world
... based on unicode, but making this happen is quite complex

<r12a> writing systems, languages and local cultural needs

Virginie: writing vertically is a known challenge, right-to-left
... other things are cultural
... those are the aspects i18n takes into account

[slide 8: I18n structure]

<chaals> [I noticed today a suggestion for thousands separators. Which is great, except that in some big places numbers aren't divided into thousands the way they are in most western cultures…]

Virginie: There's an i18n Interest Group and Working Group and other related interest and community groups
... Please, talk to the Internationalization Working Group

[slide 9: I18n support]

<koaliie> Best practice guidelines for developing spec

Virginie: Also, typography index
... link between your working group and i18n WG for your issues; ask the team
... Richard?

Richard: We're happy to hear from you quite early on
... it's been a problem in the past that people reach LC, think the spec is done, they're exhausted and send it to i18n and we identify problems and it doesn't go well
... Contact us at an early stage; FPWD is a good time to ping us
... please write to the internationalization working group
... member list if you need to
... but we do our work in public

<r12a> www-international@w3.org

<r12a> public-i18n-core@w3.org

<virginie> Addison Phillips aphillips@amazon.com

Virginie: What is expected on the Domain side is to take care of these people seeking help
... chairs and editors will get some support
... don't be afraid to take that step
... there will be someone to help you

Richard: as Chairs, please try to make sure your specs are easy to understand
... we're not experts in your domain
... we often have the possibility to read your spec 2 or 3 times before we can comment
... so please, make it easier for us to understand
... a brief summary of algorithms is extremely helpful for us.

<chaals> [+1 to making specs easy to understand - for implementors whose developers mostly don't speak english as a first language, it is also helpful]

Richard: I'd like to say that the idea to have a champion for i18n is good but don't rely on your champion to do everything
... every one in the WG learns as they go

Virginie: Thanks Richard. Good comment on readable spec. It applies to all.

Accessibility : A11y [slide 11]

Virginie: the idea is that anyone with disability can access the Web
... it's not just about being social, but improving the capability of the technology
... by putting some good accessibility in your technology, you improve on SEO and device independance
... the accessibility domain addresses web content, user agent, assistive device to translate text into voice, everything that allows you to be an author, and tools that asess the level of accessibility of a technology.
... strong culture at W3C

[slide 12: A11y structure]

Virginie: WAI == Web accessibility Initiative at W3C

[slide 13: A11y support]

Virginie: W3C specs should support accessibility; it's important that chairs and editors support that statement

<koaliie> Web Technology Accessibility Guidelines

<koaliie> Draft Checklist

Virginie: Also, there's an IRC channel for 24/7 discussion

<koaliie> a11ySlackers channel

[slide 14: A11y contact]

Virginie: your contact is Janina Sajka, chair of the APA WG, and Michael Cooper, staff contact
... Judy Brewer, leader of the WAI, can help you

Jeff: Sorry Judy wouldn't be here; if people have questions, and they're simple, I'd be happy to answer
... chaals may also be able to answer
... otherwise, I'm happy to bring back questionx to Judy
... and I'll get back to you.

Privacy [slide 15]

Virginie: Key point for privacy: ensure no illegitimate access to data related to the user's activity on the Web
... user tracking principle, like making sure a user can not be tracked
... this also relates to finger-printing (being able to detect specific characteristic that identify a user)
... privacy also covers the API design
... by designing some specific functions in API, you may give a hand to somone trying to steal user data

[slide 16: Privacy structure]

Virginie: Privacy at W3C is an Interest Group and the Tracking Protection WG
... you should ask reviews to the Privacy Interest Group

<koaliie> Privacy activity

[slide 17: Privacy support]

<koaliie> Draft: Fingerprint guidance for editors

<koaliie> Draft: TAG review questionnaire

Virginie: This TAG questionnaire is the result of a conversation between the WebAppSec WG and the TAG
... you should be able to answer it and it should be the beginning of your review
... goal is to raise awareness
... please go and have a look at this questionnaire

[slide 18: Privacy contacts]

Security [slide 19]

Virginie: Data is sensitive and has value. Objective is to make sure business on the Web can be done in a trusted way
... the security activity adapts the security model with new features and special care in API design

[slide 20: Security structure]

Virginie: Security activity at W3C includes Web App Sec WG, Web Crypto WG, Web Payment WG and the Web Security Interest Group that I chair
... We lack security resource in that Interest Group
... nonetheless, this is where you should send your review requests
... The TAG as well
... please, don't hesitate to contact them

[slide 21: Security support]

Virginie: Again, the draft TAG review questionnaire covers security and privacy
... Wendy?

Wendy: Thanks Virginie
... I'll point to the security questionnaire that we've seen a few groups use as an appendix to their documents
... putting the text in your draft as an appendix is one way to show that your document has considered privacy and security concerns
... and is a good starting point for experts to work from
... whether something is missing and other considerations that should be taken into account before the spec moves forward
... we aim to help
... we want to help get your help move forward with due consideration for security and privacy
... let's get those out and early in the process

Virginie: As W3C we have to do that.
... We're done with general review

[slide 23: acknowledgements]


<Zakim> chaals, you wanted to ask what happens if you *fail* a privacy review?

chaals: What happens if you fail a review?
... what if you find a problem and it's very very difficult to resolve?

Virginie: There are some topics that are so sensitive that they were rejected
... this can happen
... it's the worse case
... nevertheless, the privacy topic has been handled for a few years now at W3C
... and people can help you determine that you're going to fail
... after that, I'm hoping we're in a modern society and are able to find a solution to the privacy problems

Wendy: The DNA on the Web Community Group!
... it's a joke
... but in a more serious vein, we, as team, make recommendations to the Director
... for review and transitions of documents
... I would not recommend a spec that has security and privacy flaws be approved for transition; on the other hand, a document that discussed the privacy and security considerations and addressed the tradeoffs with user consent could be recommended

Virginie: At least it's clear
... If you have feedback on this training, please let me know or Coralie

<chaals> [Merci beaucoup Virginie, this was good.]

Virginie: please, inform your working group at your next call

<chaals> [note https://http://www.w3.org/wiki/DocumentReview …]

Virginie: let them know of horizontal review
... and start finding your champion

<r12a> [thanks Virginie ! ]

Virginie: See you all at TPAC!

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.140 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/10/19 14:49:19 $